Studio Design for a 28' by 22' garage

one more thing. i wanted to amend my "tentative" plan i mentioned a few posts back. after i put down new asphalt paper, i'm pretty sure i'll be able to fold my original asphalt paper back on top of it. although i guess on the top i want the old paper to be on the outside. what i probably need to do is caulk between the mortar and the old paper, put down my new paper, then fold the old paper down on top of the new paper, and then caulk again between the studs and the old paper. i will need probably to use some kind of tape to tape the old and new asphalt paper together. or maybe some roofing cement or something. this is one part i haven't figured out. i trust mike won't mind me going into these details here, since he is contemplating similar issues :) dan

Wow, thats alot of thinkin in one blow. Thanx Dan and Keith for your insights. Or are you guys just tryin to trip me up on the home stretch.(LOL).

Looks like a good plan to me, Mike. (me = a clueless dolt though

Ya keith and weve all viewed your string 12682 times and reponded 308 times(very lengthy at times) cause we just like watchin dolts. And sorry for the string hogging Keith. Anyway, I think I should clarify some things about my "plan". First, out of my lack of knowledge of materials, I may have seemed to be supporting Quickwall over morter. But I didn't know much of morter, and Im definetly open to either. I guess price and performance would be the factors. Secondly, as discussed between me and Mr. Knightfly, I intended to smooth stucco and only apply 1 layer of drywall. The 3 layers will be the inner leaf. I'm not sure, from reading those posts, if you thought I was putting the 3 layers as my "beef-up". My principle thought behind the Quickwall ( or morter ) was to apply about 1 layers drywall worth ( or more if I can) to not have to deal with the drywall at all. It seems to me that drywall would cost more (not sure of that) and be more time consuming. Dan said even after leveling mortar the best he could, it was still a little uneven. If I apply, lets say more cement like material, and level it the best i can, and since I wouldnt be using drywall, this should be good enough. I save drywall, whatever I use for the side mounts(forgot the name) and Ill use less caulk. Sound good? Im still very open to adding a layer on the inside and skipping this, if it wil work. I only brought this Quickwall up from a Dan idea I looked up.

Why not hire a stucco contractor to simply add another good thick layer of stucco on the outside walls?? (besides cost, obviously... )

Ive thought of this too. It might be costly, but can be done later as well. I could build, test, and decide if and how thick to go after. (not many opporunities like that in this building stuff). I can finish the studio and get more cash for Exoskeleton beef up later as well. Not to mention finding a deal. So maybe....

i trust mike won't mind me going into these details here, since he is contemplating similar issues

No problem Dan, My post is your post. Lastly ( for now), concerning the swamp cooler quote from keith..

Second, they cool air by blowing it over cool water, which does cool the air somewhat but it adds humidity in the process. (This is why they're more common here, because we Californians can usually afford to add some humidity during the cooling process.) I would think that with airtight rooms, multiple warm bodies exhaling, and sensitive equipment, making the air more humid is the last thing you'd want to do. Finally, I don't think they can keep up with the heat we experience here in our part of California

Well keith, I agree that the swamp cooler probably sucks. But the PDF i read said

Indirect evaporative cooling is not as effective as direct evaporative cooling, but adds no moisture to the supply air.

I know that probably dont mean much, but thought Id ask. The fact it uses 100% outside air is what really drew me in. Although I dont want HUGE ducts. So probably not. As for the hydronic HVAC. If any one knows more of this, please tell me more. Looks kinda cool. Well thats that, thanx for the support and rok on..

hey mike, sorry i forgot you were not beefing up as much as i thought, so it does make more sense to think about using more stucco instead of drywall to do the beef up. all things considered your plan seems ok. because if you do not smooth you will definitely have to add more drywall than one layer. i think 1/2 inch of drywall is easier to put up than 1/2 inch of mortar/whatever, much easier. but since you will have to deal with mortar anyway since you are smoothing, you may just do a very thick layer of mortar/quickwall and be done with it. sorry i my ramblings confused you. it was a bit late and slightly beer-fueled :) :) my point i guess was that having done some of this mortaring business, i would much rather put up 3 layers of drywall instead. it's THAT much of a pain in the ass. one thing i would definitely suggest is do not commit to doing it one way or the other. buy a small amount of materials and experiment on a small section first. see if you like the mortar or quickwall. just don't cut up all your building paper and then realize you wish you hadn't. speaking of which, one thing i said earlier wasn't quite right, when i said a leaf doesn't have resonance by itself. that's not quite accurate, i think any piece of material has a resonance or resonances depending on how it is attached, but this (if i got this right) is the same thing as coincidence frequency, not something we worry about too much, usually these are pretty high-frequency effects that can be disregarded (depending on material) ... i wanted to correct myself before someone else did :oops: dan

think 1/2 inch of drywall is easier to put up than 1/2 inch of mortar/whatever, much easier. but since you will have to deal with mortar anyway since you are smoothing, you may just do a very thick layer of mortar/quickwall and be done with it. sorry i my ramblings confused you. it was a bit late and slightly beer-fueled

1) are you using 1/2 for a specific reason? cause its cheap right now? 2)I didnt really expect the mortar to be easier, but since I have to anyway it just seems redundant. Also since I woudn't be attching drywall my smoothing is dependant on air gaps. Is the leveling the hardest part? Then I think this way would definitely be easier. And cheaper? I think I need to really asses my bowing stucco, because I was out there yesterday and I didnt seem much at all. Would this make leveling mortar an easier step, and then making drywall beefup the easier path? Or is leveling leveling, if you do it you do it?

it was a bit late and slightly beer-fueled

Maybe oyuve found the secret Dan. Heroin for jazz, coke for rock, and beer for designing studio.

my point i guess was that having done some of this mortaring business, i would much rather put up 3 layers of drywall instead. it's THAT much of a pain in the ass.

again is it the leveling or the whole process?

ne thing i would definitely suggest is do not commit to doing it one way or the other. buy a small amount of materials and experiment on a small section first. see if you like the mortar or quickwall. just don't cut up all your building paper and then realize you wish you hadn't.

Amen brother.

speaking of which, one thing i said earlier wasn't quite right, when i said a leaf doesn't have resonance by itself. that's not quite accurate, i think any piece of material has a resonance or resonances depending on how it is attached, but this (if i got this right) is the same thing as coincidence frequency, not something we worry about too much, usually these are pretty high-frequency effects that can be disregarded (depending on material) ... i wanted to correct myself before someone else did

I thought of that two, but dont worry, I think your reputation in the "acoustic industry" is safe. thanx again Dan

Lookee there, Mikey -- you've got 4,000 views on your thread now! Keep this up and you'll be a rockstar! Oh yeah, you already are a rockstar! Never mind... :roll:

mikeklooster wrote:

1) are you using 1/2 for a specific reason? cause its cheap right now?

no just as an example. i was probably going to use 1/2 because it's easier for one person to buy, move around and put up than 5/8.

mikeklooster wrote:

2)I didnt really expect the mortar to be easier, but since I have to anyway it just seems redundant. Also since I woudn't be attching drywall my smoothing is dependant on air gaps. Is the leveling the hardest part? Then I think this way would definitely be easier. And cheaper?

applying mortar is time consuming. but, you don't have to get it smooth since that is your final layer, so that's something in its favor. you aren't really leveling, just bulking up. if it's a little uneven no harm done.

again is it the leveling or the whole process?

well if you aren't leveling it WOULD go a lot quicker. that's a good point. maybe soon if i can get some time to work, i'll do a "speed layer" where i try to smooth out a 16" section as fast as i can. then i'll report back ...

I think your reputation in the "acoustic industry" is safe.

ha ha ... i'm sure everyone realizes by now that i often don't know what i'm talking about :D :D .... dammit mike, i'm a graphic designer not an acoustician :lol:

just another product I found, any ideas http://www.merkote.com/merkrete/hg-2k-01.htm and this is interesting stuff I dont have the attention span to figure out http://www.merkote.com/merkrete/thinset-mortaradd-1.htm and http://www.mortarnet.com/ is this so you dont have to cut paper? http://www.merkote.com/merkrete/underlaymentsys-1.htm Are one of these my beef up material?

Mike, I'm on a REALLY slow connection and not much time ATM, but I'm curious; have you measured the "topography" of your inside stucco surface? Just a general idea, lay a straight edge across the surface and get a rough measurement of the peak-to-valley height, worst/average case?? Hopefully I'll get a bit more time (and broadband) tonite, it's been a fun few weeks and will probably continue for the most part... Steve

thanx steve ill be lookin out 4 ya. Ill try that, any idea on whats bad and what aint shit. Im lookin for cheap easy and effective...oh wait thats a hooker

I'm thinkin' 2x2' chunks of drywall, buttered fairly heavy with plain ol' drywall mud (bit more water), those would be small enough to be manageable and you could make sure the gaps were full as you went. BTW, I don't think adding another layer (or two, preferably) would be all that expensive, although the "insert" way doesn't require outside (paid) labor - I'd get a couple quotes on the extra stucco before deciding. Keep in mind that stucco is almost a direct replacement for gypsum mass-wise... Steve

Ok..steve 1) can or should I do the 2x2 method on roof as well or stick to sheets or maybe 2x4'?

BTW, I don't think adding another layer (or two, preferably) would be all that expensive, although the "insert" way doesn't require outside (paid) labor - I'd get a couple quotes on the extra stucco before deciding. Keep in mind that stucco is almost a direct replacement for gypsum mass-wise... Steve

2) addidng another layer or two of the drywall way? 3) is the "insert" way that doesnt require outside labor my stucco filler idea? I was aware that the masses were similar. Now its down to ease and cost. Any thoughts , if done my way, on the chosen filler mortar or maybe these fancy mortar for tile I found in 2 posts back?

mike, those merkrete products are interesting, but they say they are waterproof? i'm still fuzzy on whether waterproof means vapor impermeable in cases like this. but my quick look thru of the specs didn't turn up anything. ideally this stuff would be vapor permeable and then i think it would be cool. otherwise i think it could be a problem in climates like ours (mixed). by the way i did manage to speed-mortar a section today so i'll post info about that in my thread. dan

Ok. Getting away from my "beef up" questions. Mr Dan Hornack form Kenetics emailed me back about specifics for using Isomax clips to hang my 3 layer ceiling from the rafters in my live room. Heres the response from the engineer....

To following is Steve Manos @ Kinetics response. Please call me if you have questions. "Refer to attached. It is OK to use Model IsoMax for this application. Make sure that the drywall used across the vaulted ceiling rests on top of the drywall used along the walls i.e. it can't hangout unsupported. Minimum three (3) IsoMax per rafter, but if the OSB is employed in the composite, use four (4) IsoMax. IsoMax at each end should start no more than 3" from end of rafter; the others should be evenly spaced between. That's it."

Thats pretty good news, being that they were origanally saying I couldnt use Isomax on a vaulted ceiling. It does raise some new questions, though.(surprised?) If the drywall has to sit on the drywall of the walls. There is coupling, right? How bad is this coupling? Is there anything I can do to aleviate it some? Does it make it so bad I should just attach the drywall directly to the rafters? That seems bad, but if the reating of the ceiling on the walls is as bad coupling, It sure would be alot cheaper and easier, so theres always a light... Any new hanger clip products found lately. I seem to remeber keith mentioning something from his consultants. Heres a view of the roofline I want to follow...

I have been very frustrated with figuring out if I should do this beef up. It seem tedious, expensive, and tome consuming for as much as I need to do. My stucco actually seems to be an inch, not accounting for dips, but I think theres more hillls than dips. Im thinking of a 3layer leaf probably OSB,5/8" Drywall,and more 5/8" rock and calling it a day This whole time Ive been designing, me and my neighbor have been jamming in his open garage. And thats not my main drummer who lives next door. Its very lax here and Im ready to get back to work on music. Will that result in a fair amount of isolation. I can deal with a little audible. I have thought of trying mass vynil for a beef up around my live room. I know its expensive, but if it could some how compensate for the rough stucco, maybe worth it. Probably not though,.... So, lately I have been delving back into general layout. Ive been playing with the shapes and seem to have found a happy medium between a big CR decent size Live room. Of course my nemesis of the 7' beam (where my garage door used to be, and I have since added 4' beyond that wall frame) has been tricky to get around. But I think Ive got it... So.. Heres my Garage.(pic 1). Its 22'W by 28'L. The pink ring is stucco. Green wall frames w/ studs. A dark grey ring of the cement slab 6" lip.The lighter green frames are the extention walls.And If you notice the extention is over the drive way slap. Two section with a split. Now heres that nasty beam sittin about 7' of the ground. After alot of deliberation, and plan after plan, Ive decided to use the extention,above the 7' beam to house HVAC equipment. So I will be attching "attic" floor joists around 7' between the beam and the new extended wall. Check it... Ill probably be doing that early on but lets get away from that for a minute....Heres my revised, reshaped, optomistic, proposed new plan.. I feel really good about the shapes and sizes. Plenty of room in CR for bass traps. Its widest pint is over 15' wide. I had to spin it for a desirable back slope and to ovoid the cement protrusion on the right side. The walls are 16 degrees played. Its about 13'6" or 14' Long. Id like to know if a Control Room HAS to be decoupled from exterior wall frames. Its "stereo loud" and would be a WHOLE lot easier. The iso is coupled, for simplistic reasons, and I think Im prepared to deal with its limitation. If I could couple the CR with the structure and 3 layers of material would suffice, I could share the Iso CR adjacent wall, maybe a staggered stud wall. Less door, more real estate for CR or to give back to Live Room. But wait, what about that stupid 7' beam????.... Im going to have an 8'6" ceiling in the CR and then theres this beam.And since ive tilted the room, it comes in diagonally. Well, Ive think Ive got that solution. Here we go. First carry the wall at 8.5' all the way till just before the beam. Then install 8.5" high ceiling joists all the way to the beam, In the direction of the building, not the room.. Being sure that the last one is maybe a couple to a few inches in front of the "Beam Wall".... Those joists are 16" spaced but probably should be 24", right? Also I had planned to use 2x6 framing, but would love to use 2x4s on the CR. And to ask again...Can I couple, like the iso, and with 2x4s, please..?? Anyway, ...Remeber that last 8.5" joist a coiuple of inches from the horrific "BEAM WALL"..The wall frames after this pint need to be dropped to be just under the "BEAM WALL". Not touching and 3.5" later all clear to wrap up at the end.. I suggest we add a 7' joist directly under that last 8.8' joist. And continue out...Like this... see next post...

Heres that pic of the 7' joists... Well Ok. I forgot one detail. Remember the "attic/HVAC room"? I want these 7' joist's bottoms to lay like 2" under the beam. That way If I have one in front, I can just put one right after the beam and the drywall wont touch! Then Ill, or before, install the perpindicular "attic joists" above that so im isolated but I dont have to lose lots of space..The beam is 4X12 so I say screw the airspace around the beam. The sound still has to go through the attic, and its only 4"(3.5" I think) thick. Heres what I mean...Actually I wanted to say that, but Ill get back to that.. First, Id like ti discuss hor I think I can dea with the beam protruding at an angle... I had askes about approaching this drop before a John said OK. Im facing down i the CR and I will hang clouds to compensate for the step... Id like to mirror that angle with framing to do something like this...Ive only shown the angled joist..I have some framing plots, but since I lack experience I thought Id leave it to interptretation..Mainly Imagine it creating a 1.5' drop in the shape of a "V" . Remeber Ill cloud up to it..Look at it.... Like I said. As for securing this, I left details out..for interpretation..But I do think its possible, so I f you know how..Great!!. So, back to the joists hanging down 2"s below the beam, and stuff. This way I can pass the beam without losing more hieght and staying decouple. See what I mean by easier to couple...?? Heres all the CR joists..Remember the last joist is both 8.5' and 7' with whatever it takes inbetween to hold the drywall. Originally this solution I had the angled new protrusion coupled off the beam and wanted to use the beam and atttic frame to hold ny 7' ceiling and the 1.5' vertical "V" it leads to then let the 8.5' joist take over form there. But I realized one thing. If I could incorperate this Idea into totally decoupled framing, as opposed to semi-decoupled framing, I run the chance of picking up HVAC vibrations in my ceiling from the fact it is my "attic" floor. Id love to couple, but I thnk if its better not to, I should go all the way. Lastly heres a complteted with attic for your 3D imagination...

Mike, I'm almost positive you can't use a 2x4 as a "joist" anywhere on any spacing, so you'd be looking at 2x6 throughout. That being said, I like your idea of maintaining symmetry of your control room ceiling using the wedge-shaped "soffit" thing. That's clever and seems not to complicate your construction very much. I suggest that you build the room without that soffit, and then add the soffit last -- literally installing wedge-shaped box onto the ceiling and wall. This should address the need for the fire break where the soffit meets the wall. Hey, maybe you can make that thing a big silencer, maybe even a "dual" silencer (if it's big enough), similar to the "soffit style silencers" I'm going to make... :roll: Also, it's cool how you've uploaded your images into your post, which appear at the bottom by default, but then "include" them in the context of your post. The only downside is that the images appear twice and it can be pretty overwhelming for folks. (Ha! Look who's talkin'! :lol:) Perhaps you have some free Web space with your DSL service that you can use to host your images, which would eliminate the "double vision" thing from happening...

Mike, I'm really sorry I've not had the time to dig into your concerns much, hopefully that will change in a couple days - my roof has GOT to be #1 priority, otherwise you guys won't get ANY help if me and my 'puter are both drowned :cry: One comment - if you have about an inch of stucco, and the way you describe your community situation, I'd think that a second frame with 3 layers of 5/8 drywall (and insulation) would be enough. Much more than that and you'll lose it to ceiling, flanking, doors, etc, anyway. I'll try to read your last 100 questions and catch up soon :wink: Steve

I'll bet Mike is dancing with that assurance that his outer leaf beef-up is not necessary in your opinion! I'll even dance a little on his behalf! :twisted: --Keith :mrgreen:

see keith, I would dance, and youd think a lazy guy like me would dance at less work. But theres two things you have to understand about a truly devote lazoid. 1)dancing and happiness are exertions of energy, or much like work 2)Lazy people expect to do things the easy way, so were just dissapointed when they are hard... you said something about 2x4 joists are no good. Oh i didnt know that.but thats ok, if thats the norm Im mostly speaking of anting to use 2x4 framing on the Control Room. And again Id like to couple it,too. Share the wall with the iso and Id get more real estate. But if I should probably stick to decoupled I think this plan will work. Also I had another question...I see Control Rooms that are not symmetrical in shape but the bass traps make it symmetrical after they are done. For instance.... Notice NO DECOUPLING and the unsymmetrical shape, although corrected by the bass traps. Is this OK? What are the advantages/dissadvantages to shaping the symmetry only in the bass traps. Except that its easier? Thanx again steve, I know your busy, but think of it this way. If your making music and someone wants it "wetter", well, your the guy! You can make MILLIONS... OOps I caught the mistake...The decoupled walls or atleast double frames. But I have seen pictures like this. And that brings me too. In situation where you must or at least decide to couple, does the double frame lose all of its usefullness. Or for a coupled room at least you have a large airspace? A little confused on that, too.

Mike, first of all can you explain exactly what you mean by "couple" in this context? Or draw a sketch with labels, maybe? I want to be sure of what you're asking before I answer something totally different and confuse BOTH of us... Next, I've pieced together 6 span calculations - the top two are for 5 PSF dead load, which you do NOT want to do - two layers of 5/8 gypsum weigh right at 4.7 PSF WITHOUT FRAME; and span calculations INCLUDE the frame weight, so a 2x4, 24" center ceiling with two layers of 5/8" gyp would come in at about 5.7 to 6 PCF - no room for bad knots, sloppy nailing, etc... IF you look at the bottom right, it's the ONLY one that will span 15 feet with a 10 PSF dead load; and only then by using 12" centers. Now, realistically you could stretch that span a bit since you would be closer to 5 PSF than to 10 PSF; still, underkill tends to kill, at least in this case (or at least give someone a helluva headache) Trying to remember all your questions, failing miserably (need to rest up enough to go to bed :? ) one I remember - tying ceiling wallboard into wall wallboard, and isolation effect - roughly 2 dB, more or less, with no actual TESTED and proven cases I'm aware of. Rod likes to do the "Z" joint between ceilings and walls because it's more reliable; works for me too. http://www.johnlsayers.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=19989 Think I'm rested enough to make it into the sack, shingles go on tomorrow :D :D (The second one is me, also; I'm beside myself with Joy - but don't tell my wife, I don't think she knows about Joy yet :wink: )

Hey Steve, I noticed your span calculator fuses "dead load" with "live load," such that it seems you can't spec your own figures there. The span calculator I've used on the Web lets you choose live load specs separate from dead load specs. In other words, you could spec especially heavy dead loads but leave the live loads really light -- ideal for figuring heavy ceilings below attics that will take on minimal live loads, or (even better) interleaved/staggered joists that will never take on a live load. I have my doubts about the above calculator's "bearing edge" measurements (as first noticed by Sir Rod Gervais). Perhaps this is enough reason to suspect the accuracy of the tool altogether... :roll: I also noticed that the above calculator seems to be more conservative than the one you're using... But that might be because there are more specs than I'm seeing on your Span Calc application, so maybe I'm not comparing apples to apples. Or maybe it's just crap. ;-) Thoughts?

Mike, first of all can you explain exactly what you mean by "couple" in this context? Or draw a sketch with labels, maybe? I want to be sure of what you're asking before I answer something totally different and confuse BOTH of us...

I mean if I didnt have to worry about tying i to the outer wall frame in my framing. It would then allow me to share the wall between the CR and ISO and be bigger and easier. But I think I can do it the way I have planned, just looking for shortcuts.

Next, I've pieced together 6 span calculations - the top two are for 5 PSF dead load, which you do NOT want to do - two layers of 5/8 gypsum weigh right at 4.7 PSF WITHOUT FRAME; and span calculations INCLUDE the frame weight, so a 2x4, 24" center ceiling with two layers of 5/8" gyp would come in at about 5.7 to 6 PCF - no room for bad knots, sloppy nailing, etc...

Im sorry if Ive brought confusion. It seems every one is concerned about the size of joist(2x4 or 2x6). Until keiths post I didnt know that 2x6 are standard. I have someone building this that would have told me and I dont really care if joists are 2x4 or 2x6, whatevers proper. I meant I would like to use 2x4 framing on the control room otherwise. When we(me and steve) talked on the phone, we talked about using 2x6 framing for is rigidness and strength. Ive planned this since then, but I would like to use 2x4 on the CR if I knew it would stand with 3 layers. Thats all, sorry.

rying to remember all your questions, failing miserably (need to rest up enough to go to bed ) one I remember - tying ceiling wallboard into wall wallboard, and isolation effect - roughly 2 dB, more or less, with no actual TESTED and proven cases I'm aware of. Rod likes to do the "Z" joint between ceilings and walls because it's more reliable; works for me too.

I think your refering to how I meet up the layers. Ive seen the Z and I plan it. Ive been under the impression that not letting the ceiling wallboard touch the wall board, especially when ceiling is attached to the outer structure. I remember 1/4"(or1.8") gap with caulk between layers edges.Kenetic's Dan said to hang live room ceiling with clips I need the ceiling wall board to rest on walls wallboard. Im OK with this if it keeps me from dying. But ultimitly, Im not sure I know what question your referencing. I know I have alot, but not sure where your going on this one. Also remember< by your suggestion I plan to sister rafters to and add collar ties to support all this drywall. Thanx for the love, and also I now have realized the picture I grabbed in a hurry was totally symmetrical, but they are here , so Ill find one later,sorry.

Ok. Ive had a chance to look at your span calculator steve. I guess since the longest joist is over 15' I should go with 12" spaced 2x6.(20live/10 dead load).Heres something interesting..If you notice my pic with CR joists. I put them at 16", except the last one at the top. I put it in more to have one near the end. This diagram is totally scratch, but it leads me to a question...Since the 12" spacing really only applies to the back can I change the spacing as the room narrows? No big deal, just curious. Also, I forgot to mention..Even though I dont want to have to beef up my stucco. I noticed that my 4' extention stucco is nice and flat under the paper. So as far as I know, I can easily beef this up by just attching drywall to the paper and cleat in. This is good, I think. It the closest to neighbors, and such. Also not sure of its thickness. May be less than old stucco. One more thing, Im still considering beefing up ceiling with one layer. Its flat(plywood). Again remember, I had planned to sister roof rafters and add collar ties for support. Also remember that the live room will have a 3 layer ceiling hanging off the rafters with probably kenetics clips. So I must support all this. Should I beef up the whole roof(even over the CR and ISO that have 8.5' flat ceilings that create alot of airspace) or just over the live room? And do I sister all the rafters? add collar ties to all new rafters(that leaves me with ORIG:2x6 rafters, 2x10 collar ties on every other rafter and raised half way up, with NEW:2x6 sister rafters(steve suggested 2x8, but Id love to use 2x6 instead) and 2x8 collar ties on every new rafter matching the 2x10 height. Heres a pic of the Origanal Rafter setup, and then with sistered rafters and added collar ties.. Thats it for now, and thanx again.... mike

mikeklooster wrote:

I noticed that my 4' extention stucco is nice and flat under the paper. So as far as I know, I can easily beef this up by just attching drywall to the paper and cleat in. This is good, I think. It the closest to neighbors, and such. Also not sure of its thickness. May be less than old stucco.

You should be able to ask your contractor about the make-up of that wall. Is it like mine (stucco on chicken wire on styrofoam on OSB on paper)? If so, then be aware that the total thickness is exaggerated by the styrofoam (bad), but you should be able to screw into the OSB (good). Although that may put your paper in the wrong place... :roll:

Should I beef up the whole roof(even over the CR and ISO that have 8.5' flat ceilings that create alot of airspace) or just over the live room? And do I sister all the rafters?

I would think you'd need to do the whole thing, since the "sealed attic" will be shared by all rooms. We'll see what Steve says. --Keith :mrgreen:

The span calc I use does more than shown in the pic; main reasons I like it are it's quick, painless and slightly pessimistic (less death) - you can either use it online or click on the bottom link here http://www.cwc.ca/design/tools/calcs/SpanCalc_2002/ Mike, your roof as it exists right now weighs approximately 3,600 pounds - it's under-engineered because it's old and they "got away with it" - if you add another layer of ply to the pitched part, and hang 3 layers of drywall on the lower part (but still on the rafters weight-wise) you will be ADDING another 6,000 PLUS pounds for a total of roughly 9,600 pounds on a frame that is UNDER-designed for the weight it's already carrying - you say you don't want to use 2x8's, yet you will be nearly TRIPLING the total roof/ceiling weight. I have only one question - DO YOU HAVE A DEATHWISH??!? If so, please don't tell anyone you talked to ME; I've already seen enough mayhem for one lifetime, thank you very much... If not, I need you to CONCISELY list the questions you still have hanging, and if they need a long explanation to further confuse me please LINK to the thread page where that explanation/drawing exists - and I will try to get you caught up (finally) - The good news is, it's starting to sound like you're getting close to a total solution, so hopefully this next part won't be too painful... Steve